Will send up a satellite mothballed during the Bush Administration.

SpaceX announced that it had won two big US Air Force launch contracts Wednesday. If successful, the two demonstrations would help them qualify to compete for Air Force business against launch provider ULA (United Launch Alliance), which currently has a stranglehold on the largest Air Force launches.

The first launch, planned for a Falcon 9, will send up the long-awaited NASA DSCOVR satellite to a distant point between the Sun and the Earth, where it can look at the Earth with the Sun behind it. The second, a Falcon Heavy launch, will put up several satellites and a 5 metric ton ballast, in an effort to demonstrate the Falcon 9 Heavy for the Air Force. Both contracts fall under the Air Force's OSP-3 (Orbital/Suborbital) program, an Air Force program specifically designed to bringing in new launch companies.

"GoreSat" rises from storage

DSCOVR, NASA's Deep Space Climate Observatory, has been in deep storage since 2001, when it was imprisoned by the incoming Bush Administration. DSCOVR is designed to measure the Earth's albedo by tracking sunlight reflected back from the Earth from a distant vantage point. Former Vice-President Al Gore suggested that a video camera be installed on the satellite, with the hope that the constant video feed of the distant Earth would provide the same kind of "Blue Marble" perspective that the first pictures from Apollo did. The original Blue Marble picture is probably the most-circulated picture in human history, and is widely credited with contributing to the start of the modern ecology movement.

Climate skeptics quickly labeled the satellite "GoreSat", and the Bush Administration cancelled its scheduled launch from Shuttle Columbia in 2003. The satellite stayed in storage until November 2008, when, shortly after Barack Obama's election, it was hauled back out and began undergoing recertification. Originally known as "Triana", the satellite was renamed DSCOVR, and has now gained both a 2014 launch contract as an Air Force test payload and an additional mission: serve as a sentry for solar storms. As of this week, DSCOVR has a contract aboard a Falcon 9 rocket to Earth/Sun L1, about 1.5 million kilometers sunward.

The Heavy is slated for a first flight some time in 2013. If successful, it could vie for the heaviest Air Force payloads while providing much lower prices. The 2015 Air Force demo flight has an orbital latitude (24 degrees) that suggests that it will be launched from Florida. SpaceX does not currently have a launch facility in Florida large enough for the Falcon Heavy, although they have been in negotiations with NASA over refurbishing the storied Launch Pad 39A, which handled the Apollo launches. The Air Force contract implies a 3-year deadline for SpaceX to get a capable launch pad ready, either at Kennedy or some other location.

According to the mission requirements, the Falcon Heavy must carry its payload up to an orbit of 720 km and deploy a COSMIC-2 weather- and atmospheric-monitoring satellite, up to six auxiliary payloads (probably microsats), and up to eight P-POD CubeSat deployers. The rocket should then restart and continue all the way up to a 6,000 x 12,000 km orbit and deploy the ballast, more science experiments and more microsats. After coasting for a few hours, it needs to restart again, with all of these activities carefully monitored from below.

If SpaceX passes this test, they will they be allowed to bid for 14 of the 50 projected Air Force launches in the rest of the decade. The first of these launches would begin no earlier than 2017.

Launch market disruption

The decision was announced on Tuesday by Air Force Lt. Gen. Ellen Pawlikowski. At the AIAA Space 2012 Conference, she had spoken very candidly regarding the Air Force's search for ways to lower its launch costs. It appears that the Air Force has taken a big step toward increasing competition for Air Force launches.

That's something that ULA would probably like to forestall as long as possible. In answer to SpaceX's contract wins, ULA has emphasized their excellent reliability thus far. Although SpaceX has well over 40 launches booked over the next several years, they'll have their work cut out for them as they try to fulfill the contracts. According to the launch manifest posted on the SpaceX website, the company will need to launch at least a half-dozen rockets next year, and even more in years following, working their way up toward a launch every month.

ULA has already hit that pace with no losses, setting a high standard for SpaceX to match.

For now, ULA is in good shape, since it has already won a block buy of the other 36 launches that will cover the Air Force's needs for several years. Toward the end of the decade, should SpaceX succeed, ULA will be forced to find a way to lower its prices, precisely what Lt. Gen. Pawlikowski would like to achieve.

45 Reader Comments

Great story. One question that immediately comes to mind is why a 5 metric tonne ballast? There has to be a good reason (weight requirements aside) to not at least include something other than dead weight. It seems like a tremendous waste of space and money. Anyone know why?

So glad to hear that DSCOVR is finally getting launched. I understand it was developed at great cost, and for the project to be ultimately scrapped simply because it might reveal politically inconvenient facts would be a real tragedy. Even the skeptics who always say we need more data should be pleased about this.

Great story. One question that immediately comes to mind is why a 5 metric tonne ballast? There has to be a good reason (weight requirements aside) to not at least include something other than dead weight. It seems like a tremendous waste of space and money. Anyone know why?

Because they don't actually have anything else heavy enough that they can send up. There's only a certain number of available slots available for sats in the fairing, and if you can't max out the payload mass with those, you have to make it up with ballast. Yeah, technically it's wasting money, but if the rest of the payload can be delivered at a lower cost than other launchers, then it's still money well spent.

So glad to hear that DSCOVR is finally getting launched. I understand it was developed at great cost, and for the project to be ultimately scrapped simply because it might reveal politically inconvenient facts would be a real tragedy. Even the skeptics who always say we need more data should be pleased about this.

DSCOVR was originally mothballed because it was a vanity mission with too narrow a focus. It's getting flown now because its focus is being expanded.

Seems that ULA deserves a link, I mean I had to highlight it, right click on it, and "search google" for it. All because of your laziness!

For others too lazy even for that, the ULA is Lockheed + Boeing using legacy hardware to send stuff into space. That's what I gleaned from their FAQ, anyway. Rocking name for a superhero band too, btw.

you would think we would at least send up water and just let it sit up there frozen in waiting to be collected by some future mission

Well, who says it ISN'T water? Honestly, it is unlikely, but... Generally the problem is of course no space in the fairing for a real payload, and the time and cost of payload integration. The thing is space missions aren't all that flexible. There's a lot of work involved in putting all the little bits together, so it isn't like you can just slap 5000 lbs of some random payload onto any old rocket. These things all get lined up years and years in advance. No doubt there was just nothing that needed to go to the available orbits, lack of fairing space, and lack of heavier compatible payloads.

Honestly it sounds like they could use a smaller vehicle perhaps, but the point is to test the heavy. Besides 53 tons is 106,000 lbs, so they're only wasting about 4.5% of their total max throw weight, though probably more given that number is probably quoting LEO. Even so, it is likely something like 10-20%.

you would think we would at least send up water and just let it sit up there frozen in waiting to be collected by some future mission

Not a bad idea at all. Might not be really feasible, but that is nearly 5000L of water.

I'm not a rocket scientist, but maybe they don't use water because water would shift in its container, causing some problem that might affect the launch trajectory or something.

Liquids can be stored in containers that will minimize this. A good example is the internal structure of the fuel tanks of large aircraft. Too much sloshing at the wrong time there could lead to disaster.

Seems that ULA deserves a link, I mean I had to highlight it, right click on it, and "search google" for it. All because of your laziness!

For others too lazy even for that, the ULA is Lockheed + Boeing using legacy hardware to send stuff into space. That's what I gleaned from their FAQ, anyway. Rocking name for a superhero band too, btw.

ULA is kind of a spinoff of USA (United Space Alliance). USA was formed to consolidate Shuttle contractors, because apparently there actually can be too much bureaucracy for NASA, Boeing, and Lockheed It worked well enough (for Lockheed and Boeing at least) that they decided to merge their launch operations in the same way. Realistically, it was a move to pool their resources in an effort to fight off the new companies like SpaceX, who will be able to do things a lot faster and cheaper.

Realistically, it was a move to pool their resources in an effort to fight off the new companies like SpaceX, who will be able to do things a lot faster and cheaper.

Actually, it was done because the Air Force wanted two separate launch systems, but there wasn't enough contracts to go around to support two separate launch providers. So Boeing and Lockheed consolidated their launch services into one provider with two systems with increasingly shared production. SpaceX wasn't even a glimmer on the horizon at the time this happened.

you would think we would at least send up water and just let it sit up there frozen in waiting to be collected by some future mission

Not a bad idea at all. Might not be really feasible, but that is nearly 5000L of water.

I'm not a rocket scientist, but maybe they don't use water because water would shift in its container, causing some problem that might affect the launch trajectory or something.

I was thinking insulate and freeze it. A small cryogenic package with some liquid nitrogen cooling it could last quite a while before launch. All conjecture though.

karolus wrote:

Hmm...

The volume of that would be 5 cubic meters. That's a fair amount of space...

Yeah, but the fairing is like 5 meters in diameter. Twice that in length. That's a lot of room. Again conjecture. Just a thought exercise.

Satellites are bulky, and not all of the volume of the fairing is available for payload. Furthermore, its extremely unlikely the ballast will end up in an orbit that's energetically feasible for any arbitrary manned mission to get to. So all in all, not worth the effort.

So glad to hear that DSCOVR is finally getting launched. I understand it was developed at great cost, and for the project to be ultimately scrapped simply because it might reveal politically inconvenient facts would be a real tragedy. Even the skeptics who always say we need more data should be pleased about this.

As a matter of fact I for one am quite pleased to see this go up. The albedo measurement is a critical piece in understanding tropospheric behavior going forward.

you would think we would at least send up water and just let it sit up there frozen in waiting to be collected by some future mission

Not a bad idea at all. Might not be really feasible, but that is nearly 5000L of water.

I'm not a rocket scientist, but maybe they don't use water because water would shift in its container, causing some problem that might affect the launch trajectory or something.

Liquids can be stored in containers that will minimize this. A good example is the internal structure of the fuel tanks of large aircraft. Too much sloshing at the wrong time there could lead to disaster.

Actually, it was done because the Air Force wanted two separate launch systems, but there wasn't enough contracts to go around to support two separate launch providers. So Boeing and Lockheed consolidated their launch services into one provider with two systems with increasingly shared production. SpaceX wasn't even a glimmer on the horizon at the time this happened.

Boeing had also been caught red-handed conducting corporate espionage on Lockheed Martin (or rather, confidential internal Lockheed documents had been found in Boeing's hands, which is a little hard to explain away), which helped lead by and by to an arrangement where that sort of thing would be of no use to anyone. Or at least of no use to any major defense contractors.

With the Falcon Heavy, the NRO gets to put up one or more really large spy-sats. With that much lift the optics of such a spy-sat can be larger than the Hubble Space Telescope. "Hey, look, the manicurist missed a spot on Putin's pinkey!" said the president from the Oval Office.

With the Falcon Heavy, the NRO gets to put up one or more really large spy-sats. With that much lift the optics of such a spy-sat can be larger than the Hubble Space Telescope. "Hey, look, the manicurist missed a spot on Putin's pinkey!" said the president from the Oval Office.

The Falcon Heavy will indeed have higher mass capabilities, but the payload fairing (the cylindrical area the payload rides inside) is no larger than the regular F9. And it's telescope diameter that limits the angular resolution of optical systems.

Working around that limit will either take a further redesign of the upper rocket stage and fairing, or a segmented optical design, which brings in a whole lot of additional complexities. (and is, in part, one of the reasons why JWST is costing so darned much. These things are hard.)

You know, the funny thing is I'm doing some work on DSCOVR and the first I hear about the launch vehicle is by reading this.

Not so funny, really. I was getting more, more detailed, and more up-to-date intel from ars regarding all the summer 2011 hacks than I was via SIPR, while I was working as the only blue suiter in the Information Assurance (network/computer security) shop on Camp Lemonier, Djibouti, Africa (e-4 filling a gs-12 billet).

I can confidently say that the excellent reporting on ars (regarding security) directly contributed to the performance that got me a letter of commendation from the 1-star base deputy commander.

What capacity nuclear reactor (and shielding to avoid a radiation signature) could you accommodate with 5 metric tonnes of otherwise-wasted payload?

They aren't going to launch anything dangerous or extremely expensive on a test flight for a new rocket design. They don't have any problem marking launches as classified when they are, so I see no reason to believe the ballast is planned to be anything more than ballast.

What capacity nuclear reactor (and shielding to avoid a radiation signature) could you accommodate with 5 metric tonnes of otherwise-wasted payload?

They aren't going to launch anything dangerous or extremely expensive on a test flight for a new rocket design. They don't have any problem marking launches as classified when they are, so I see no reason to believe the ballast is planned to be anything more than ballast.

Clearly it's the Templars launching an Apple of Eden, so they can control all of our minds :-P

It's also possible that what is listed as "ballast" is in fact "Three Letter Acronym agency satellite".

If it was a a "three letter agency" payload, then there would be no unclassified payloads flying along with it, and you wouldn't have nearly as many details about the mission. With classified payloads, they release the launch facility, the launch date, and the launch window, and that's it.

So glad to hear that DSCOVR is finally getting launched. I understand it was developed at great cost, and for the project to be ultimately scrapped simply because it might reveal politically inconvenient facts would be a real tragedy. Even the skeptics who always say we need more data should be pleased about this.

DSCOVR was originally mothballed because it was a vanity mission with too narrow a focus. It's getting flown now because its focus is being expanded.

Prolly. Its not as if we haven't had satellites measuring earth's albedo since the 1970's. I think CERES is the current bird. Still, what with the global race to 1100 ppm CO2e, reliable heavy-lift capability to earth-sol L1 might have some beneficial implications for national security.

They want to test the ability of Falcon heavy to launch a GEO satellite without having to actually launch one. Using ballast also means they don't have to shut down SpaceX operations for security reasons. A KH-11 weighs 10 metric Kilotons, a KH12 is 18 metric Kilotons, you could add the weights up of all the other "bits" and the support structures, it will probably come up to somewhere around that mass. They'd probably want to launch something with a freaking huge radio dish to GEO though. The KH series was for LEO. A 6Km x 12Km orbit would be a way to linger over a particular area of interest just listening.